It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What happens to Israel and their nukes now?

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:53 AM
The Background.

I've been a member who generally leans toward Israel as much as others lean the other way and for a variety of reasons. Some personal, some religious and some, just how I see logic sitting to dictate my position.

That's all changed now and I'm curious what people's thoughts are? I know the opinions of those who already hate Israel so much it vibrates. I'm curious about those who have been neutral or supportive to this point.

So what, precisely has changed? Well... Everything as I see it and I don't know how deliberate this may have been by forethought but the end result is interesting to consider that way, IMO.

The Problem

Israel and their neighbors last had a good rousing war in the 70's. This, in part, led to the Camp David meetings and accords which came from it. Additional agreements followed, but in the long term, at least 3 things came to be true from all that.

#1. Israel and Egypt would be funded by Aid at rough parity for their effective power in relation to each other. Neither would become outright superior, yet neither would fall to be vulnerable, either. This worked. THIS balance was destroyed with Mursi coming to power but MAY be restored with the switch back to moderate rule in Egypt. Time will tell.

#2. The nations around Israel were expected and pressured to at least acknowledge they have a right to exist and live. Most have done this. Some....have not. Included among these hold outs is the group currently ruling Gaza...whose very mission charter spells out the removal of Israel by force and to the last person (in slightly different wording, as one might imagine..but the meaning is clear enough for anyone...and not generally disputed.) THIS issue is an ongoing one and 30+ years of headaches. IT IS NOT the main issue.

#3. Israel, having already started development in partnership with the (then) regime of South Africa, was well into Nuclear development as the unofficial history shows. By the 80's, it's believed, they had their deterrence...but from what exactly? Conventional attack brings Nuclear response? I don't THINK so...for how the world would insure they didn't live free, if at all, to enjoy that end result. Syria....was the issue and nation to deter....and the one that gave Israel pause.

Israel spent the 80's, 90's and 00's making Nuclear Weapons out of the Dimona power station and the labs beneath it. Syria spent the same decades making Chemical weapons. They balanced each other well enough for the world to ignore the fact they BOTH represented some of the last "rogue" nations not to be signed parties to the Chemical and Nuclear treaties.

The Question

The world has tolerated Israel's nukes, I believe, because any argument against them brought fingers pointing North and awkward silence. SOMEONE had to blink or be MADE to blink first. Whatever brought this around to happening? Assad was the man to blink ....and now there is a problem, isn't there?

Syria is in the process, or soon will be, of surrendering it's weapons to Russian control.

Israel still has between 80 and 120 nuclear warheads with Jerhico missiles to deliver them on.

What now?? IF......this works with Syria and IF.....they unilaterally disarm to Russia and the World? Israel is standing naked with no cover nearby. They remain the sole nation in the area to be "rogue" with known WMD ...and no nation left to claim they are needed there to deter from? Iran? Okay.... If arming up with nukes is valid by speculation alone, the whole region has a green light ...and honestly, by Israel at this stage, in what may be a self fulfilling prophecy they fear.

- - - - -

So..ATS, what say you all on how this ought to go? Again...*IF* Assad disarms as it appears he will? Should..and CAN..the world then put REAL pressure (perhaps for the first time) on Israel to declare and come under international norms for accounting with their Nukes?

I believe this has come to a point now where it may very well be a major issue and in the near future. The calls for it may start soon....has anyone else considered this?

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:07 PM
I postulated this very idea in a thread yesterday.

I absolutely agree that this will eventually be used by other countries to move the hand of the international community against Israel's chemical stockpiles.

Knowing how Israel operates they would probably use them all first and then say "WMD's? what WMD's? We don't have any of those!"

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:19 PM
reply to post by tvtexan

Oh no! I duped ya? Err.... Great minds?

You know, this is tough for me because I DO have a level of faith in Scripture, whether it be my own Faith or not. It says, so clearly a blind man couldn't miss it, Israel is not the one to stand against. Ever. Period. If one does, one does so at the risk of being proven wrong and what a wrong that would turn out to be, eh?

It's ALWAYS with this in mind, deep in the back of my mind, I watch Middle Eastern events and always have. Now, I find the whole situation coming around to a spot I said, with absolute conviction, I would NEVER EVER EVER be. That is, to see where I'd come to stand, if only in my own sincere feelings, against Israel.

Never..ever...could see how. Until now. So..could this have been orchestrated? Could the "I'll have more freedom after the election" comment made to Mevedev, meant this?

^^^^ With THAT in mind...Well? Should it even BE in mind at all? Should we look at Israel with no consideration at all to prophecy and what has been foretold...with some coming to pass by all indications, in our lifetime? Or...should we turn from anything leading around to that position that is "forbidden" in terms of Faith and future events?

It's a pickle for me...because Wiccan or not..I do value the answers and meaning to these questions. I ALSO value a world without a modern nuclear 'ground zero' to build memorials to and remember the dead. Arab, Jew or Hobbits from Middle Earth. It doesn't matter when it's millions dead.

So what is a guy to do?
edit on 11-9-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:24 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Unfortunately, Israel is not a signatory of the NPT (Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty) and has never publicly stated it has nuclear weapons even though the world knows they exist and that they indeed have them. The world should be asking them to disarm their nukes as well.
edit on 11-9-2013 by RedShirt73 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 01:36 PM

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Unfortunately, Israel is not a signatory of the NPT (Non-nuclear Proliferation Treaty) and has never publicly stated it has nuclear weapons even though the world knows they exist and that they indeed have them. The world should be asking them to disarm their nukes as well.
edit on 11-9-2013 by RedShirt73 because: (no reason given)

Exactly why this is a good question to ask as Syria was a signatory with a reservation that omitted Israel. This reinforces my belief that the US is the lap dog of Israel.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 01:42 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I am usually pretty supportive of Israel because of the attitudes and character of its neighbors/adversaries.

That said, Israel will most likely never acknowledge its nuclear program and it certainly wont disarm. I don’t know what best explains Israel’s victories against the Arabs in the four major wars they fought. They were comparably armed, but the IDF was much better trained, led and motivated than the Arabs. Even with this though, I don’t think they would want a repeat of any of the major conflicts they experienced since 1949 because the stakes are so high. A conventional attack has very real possibility of destroying Israel. The nation is physically small, and a well coordinated, multi front attack could overrun the IDF pretty quickly with a few strokes of luck.

Their nuclear program gives them the Mutually Assured Destruction card to play as their nation state adversaries aren’t suicidal. I’m not saying they (the Arabs) are rational with respect to Israel, just that self preservation is a powerful motivator that can force even the craziest lunatic to think twice.

Even if Iran was to nuke Tel-Aviv, Haifa, Beersheba, Haifa and their metropolitan areas, the IDF has several nuclear capable submarines that would ensure complete destruction of an attacker.

I don’t see any rationality in Israel giving up or even declaring its nuclear program any time soon.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 06:04 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

They will say they need them for Iran. I personally think we should have said either the nukes or our aid back in the 60s when they went behind Kennedys back and started Dimona up.

As for Syria. I think its likely chems will be used again before they can turn them over, it won't happen fast enough, or chems will be used after they have handed over and Kerry wikk be saying they held some back. We will get their eventually. I woukd say our govt is pretty annoyed by how much we pushed back. If those three options don't work we could see an attack on Israel or Americans, but we are going to Syria. Then Iran, the ultimate goal.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 07:17 PM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

You know, Iran occurred to me as a reason to keep them of course. That doesn't hold water though. If Israel needs nukes for a 'possible' Iran? Well, then Saudi ought to be a nuclear leader in warhead technology. That cross logic is also the best argument for's time Israel pony up to at least joining the world to declare and submit their weapons to the international process, just like the rest of the Nuclear club gets to deal with.

I could honestly see their point while Assad had unknown tons of slime and Israel was the whole reason why. I still can..until that issue is resolved. However, unlike some folks..I think Putin cares about being taken seriously more than just one time. So, if or when he says the weapons stocks are clear and secure? (I know.. I HATE relying on a Russian as much as many others do..but I see him with enlightened self interest to keep honest by)

After that is done, I am really thinking Israel won't have a whole lot of choice ..and the world won't forget to remind them that the other half of the problem no longer exists.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 07:22 PM
reply to post by wrabbit2000

They'll come up with a new problem, otherwise they would only have a couple of nukes. Why have so many just for Syria? They have it to destroy the world in case they are attacked by someone who could destroy them. Samson option.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 07:30 PM
reply to post by superman2012

The count I have seen from F.A.S. and from Arms Reduction paperwork that estimates those which aren't 100% known? Israel only actually has about 80. It sounds like they had a fixed number in mind, made their fill and stopped. Although, look at how small their nation is, too. The size of New Jersey. There isn't very many places to put a field of silos and any idiot with a kodak in orbit can see a new hole being dug in the Sinai, so 'middle of nowhere' like the Missile fields of Wyoming, Montana and the Dakotas aren't something they have physical room for.

Just sitting here..I can count 25 targets they'd want...on their Samson option. At least that many. I'm not sure they made more than the margin for technical errors?

Not that number much matters... 1 is too many if it's not a standoff to make giving it up, impossible. With Syria? It has been. About as realistic as the US or Russia just disarming one day with total disregard to what the other nation is doing. It would be utter insanity. .....Assad's disarming opens a new chapter (If it happens and if it's confirmed), perhaps, if anyone moves to take advantage in a positive way.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 08:42 PM
reply to post by wrabbit2000

I'd hope so.. but do I see it happening? Not really.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 09:11 PM
reply to post by wrabbit2000

I haven't seen it anywhere, but is there a guess as to the strength of their nuclear arsenal? In kilotons is it?

posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 06:51 AM
reply to post by superman2012

This is one of the better summary sheets I have around to share. Since Israel isn't in the mood to play nice with others and share their list of the other nuclear nations do? We are left to some guess work. The Federation of American Scientists comes out as a steady source of solid and usually tier 1 info. (Original source or directly from who made the analysis)

FAS Overview of Israeli Nuclear Arms Program

and no good thread about Israeli nukes would be complete, I suppose, without a nod to the man who made knowing what we do, possible.

Mordechai Vanunu

That is a "leaker" of the Daniel Ellsberg style. That's a leak source I'd say gave all (and still is) for what he couldn't live with keeping secret. You ought to read his book, if you ever get the opportunity. It's a very interesting text on the history and depth of the Israeli program.

The Whistleblower of Dimona

The book is a bit dry in spots, as I recall. It doesn't require technical knowledge to get through though as was written down to the general public on the complex things it does cover.

edit on 12-9-2013 by wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

top topics


log in